It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
No, he's not Bond, and definitely, an American, so a big no no, he didn't looked the part, not convincing as Bond.
And Lazenby for me is the closest to Fleming's Bond (moreso than Dalton) as he's the one I've envisioned while reading some of Bond's lines and thoughts in the books: that naivety, boyish nature of his.
Sure, maybe in CR, it's Dalton, but from GF onwards, I can't help but to see Laz in my mind while reading his inner thoughts and dialogues.
An unpopular opinion perhaps but Tony Curtis should've been Felix Leiter in LALD, he had shown some great chemistry with Moore in The Persuaders, they had great banter, I think that kinship could've been carried on in LALD.
David Hedison had no chemistry with Moore whatsoever, he had more chemistry with Dalton in LTK.
I think that role could've helped Curtis too as by that time, his career had faded out and he was barely getting any roles that he had the time to do drugs.
He could have been Peter Franks, though I'm not sure he would have fought as well in the elevator. ;-)
"The stiff... *ahem* deceased back there. Your brother, Mr. Franks?"
"I got a brudda."
I love that moment! Lawrence and Connery give such a memorable facial expression while Haig looks like a simpleton. :-D
It's my favorite Bond film, so I don't find it boring, either. The first third is a bit slow but I find it enjoyable for the Hitchcockian absurdity. TB is also where Connery peaked as Bond, IMO, and combined all the elements of his previous performances.
DN: Bond is lethal but not that suave or humorous, and also a bit hotheaded- more of a typical 50s/60s tough guy
FRWL: lethal, still not that humorous, but far less hotheaded and more suave and businesslike- more like Fleming's character
GF: suave but not as lethal as before, and much more sarcastic and humorous- the start of the popular image of Bond
TB: lethal, suave, and humorous all at once- Connery's definitive performance as Bond
That said, I don't think any Bond film is boring.
I love TB's underwater sequences the way I love Barry Lyndon.
Interesting, I have the opposite reaction to those: LALD is one of the few times I buy that Bond and Felix are actually friends, and I don’t really include LTK in that from the time they spend onscreen together. Hedison is nicely charismatic, but he and Dalton don’t feel like they have much in common to me.
Still want to see that Best Man speech.
I think John Terry could've been a really good Felix if he'd actually had something to work with, and he should've come back for LTK even though I really like Hedison in the role.
Yes, that's my view though, because I really liked The Persuaders and that's due to the fact that Tony Curtis had a great chemistry and banter with Roger Moore.
That's lacking a bit in Hedison, seeing him and Roger felt like foreign to me, Idk.
He and Dalton on the other hand, in LTK, felt like they have a long history together and very close.
Tony Curtis' banter would've really fit well with Roger Moore's Bond, I just want to see how Curtis would've fared in the role, if the banter and chemistry they have in TP would've been still there in LALD.
I do love David Hedison's Felix, but I think Stuart Damon would've really hit the mark.
I don't think Tony Curtis as Leiter would have worked. The Persuaders were two equals, with very opposite characters, and much of the series' appeal was their amiable bickering being on the same level. In a Bond film, however, Felix Leiter unavoidably has to play a lesser role, so as not to overshadow Bond himself. And I also strongly doubt that the producers would have been ready to pay Curtis the sums he would have asked in the early 70s just to let him play a minor supporting role.
You're still not even mentioning Luciana Paluzzi, Claudine Auger.......
While I don't find Thunderball to be boring in the traditional sense of the word, I do find it lacks the intrigue of the first three films. I think that has much to do with the structure of the film. As an audience, we see the entire plan happen. We know who replaced Domino's brother and how, we know what Largo is up to and where the bombs are stored, and thus the next hour or so of the film is waiting for Bond to catch up with what we already know.
The preceding three films take us along for the detective work, as it were, and a certain degree of suspense and intrigue is combined with the fun and adventure. I think I like that better for Connery.
With that said... Thunderball is pure fun and adventure.
Fiona Volpe is worth the price of admission alone, along with the excellent location work and Connery at his all time best in the role. It is a film loaded with atmosphere and style which more than makes up for the shortcomings I have with the plot and structure. I also don't mind the underwater stuff at all. I don't find it nearly as tedious as many make it out to be. Thunderball is a classic.
That's a really good point. It's a shame they couldn't have held something back (another aspect NSNA improves on slightly: we don't know where the bombs are- we find out about the Tears of Allah plan as Bond does I think?) or given it a twist in the end: have Largo get doublecrossed or something.
Yes there's still lots to enjoy.
You are right. Who can resist them?
Yeah. I don't want to be crass, but Luciana Paluzzi is like two reasons to find TB interesting. Very interesting...
I think Thunderball falls off a little bit after Bond turns Domino against Largo. At that point, both the novel and the film go through the motions. Bond and Leiter call for backup, an underwater fight ensues, and ultimately Domino turns up again to kill Largo. Add on that the film has an overly complex first third (or at least compared to the novel), and this film doesn't really reach the heights that I think it should.
While the first instance of two armies fighting, this occasion lacks the tension that OHMSS or TSWLM has. The second third (that is from Bond's arrival in Nassau to Bond turns Domino) fully benefits from all the lovely actors and characters.
Great points!
That’s a really good observation, those two do have a lot more tension.
Maybe part of it is that at that point Largo has already lost and is basically in retreat; there’s no imminent threat to human life, the bomb isn’t about to go off. Whereas in both YOLT and TSWLM, the armies are basically racing to stop armageddon, and essentially do so in the nick of time.
TB’s final battle is both a bit slow and lacking in stakes. In terms of stakes it’s kind of the equivalent of the scene of Goldfinger getting sucked out of the plane window because it’s more about Largo trying to escape, rather than being like the climax in Fort Knox where there’s more threat and the evil plan is about to play out, which feels like an error. The climax of your film shouldn’t feel like the epilogue. Yes he’s got the bombs, but now the US armed forces know where he is he’s not going anywhere with two nukes- there’s a lot more of them.
Funny thing: do we actually see the bombs get recovered by the US Army? I only watched it a couple of weeks ago and I can’t remember what happens to them! :D
Your macguffin needs to have stakes in order to create tension, and funnily enough the nukes are so high stakes that they’re actually very low stakes by the climax! :D
If Largo were at least backed into a corner and threatening to blow one of the nukes to take everyone with him, you’d have more tension.
Obviously I think CR06 is better than CR67, and I consider TB to be superior to NSNA. Having said that, if I'm completely honest I have a better time with CR67 than with YOLT and dare I say I enjoy NSNA more than OP.
I still prefer most EON entries to either of them, but they do have a different flavour, an alternate universe feel, to them, that I quite enjoy once in a while.
Sounds like it’s just aged badly then 😉
It does feel like a step down from GF not actually having missiles about to go off though. Hell, it’s a step down from DN. Maybe they didn’t want to repeat themselves too much with a ticking clock during the climax.
Again, they’re not a threat at the point of the climax. They’re not about to go off, the entire US military knows where they are and Largo has about 30 blokes; they’re not going anywhere. How are they a threat? Don’t just say they’re nukes: a nuke is only a threat if someone can use it. Tension makes action exciting, and tension comes from stakes. Otherwise we might as well be watching Bond on a water sports holiday.
You don’t have to disagree with everyone just for the sake of it.
I think that’s fair, I haven’t watched CR67 in years but there’s still much to be enjoyed in it. And NSNA has a lot of positives, I’m glad we have them.